so i guess i'm not familiar with this.
i saw that Harrison also raised his hand, that's why i presumed they both did.
what does "overturned" means?

Click to expand...

They both raised their hands because at the time they didn't know the call. This happens alot. Turns out the linesman called it out. So it's fognini's prerogative to challenge. He challenges, hawkeye says it's in, so the call is overturned, meaning that the ball was in, but because the call was out, which stops play, the rulebook says they have to replay the point. At the umpire's discretion, he can rule that the call didn't hinder a player, like, for example, a clean winner. The umpire saw that Harrison had a racquet on the ball, so he, as per the rules, has to rule that they replay the point.

At this point any observer may say that Harrison, despite having a racquet on the ball, was clearly not getting it back in play, as the ball was behind him and after leaving his racquet was clearly going out, but the umpire didn't, which is a strict but fair ruling. The umpire's job is to enforce the rules, he doesn't make them.

Fognini took exception to this, because if the linesman had called correctly (the ball was in), he would have won the point, because Harrison clearly wasn't hindered by the false call, and wasn't able to get the ball back in play.

Rules are rules, and Fognini was upset that they were being applied to him, which he is clearly not used to.

I like Fognini, but in another day and age there would be no Hawkeye, and he would just have to deal with bad calls like a grownup. He should have realized at the outset that the ruling was within the strictest interpretation of the rules, and gotten on with the next point, because there was no way he was winning an argument against this the umpire and the tournament referee, all in the middle of his opponent's service game.

If the call comes before the player hits the ball, the point is replayed no matter if the ball was going out. Because the call is deemed to have interupted play.

If the call comes after the player hits the ball and the player hits it out, the point is awarded.

If the call is at the same time (as claimed here) i think the point should be awarded, you cant interupt the play if it comes at the same time and quite frankly, Harrison wasnt getting that ball back even without the call. (Which for the record has to be the worst linesman call ever) Fognini was correct.

They both raised their hands because at the time they didn't know the call. This happens alot. Turns out the linesman called it out. So it's fognini's prerogative to challenge. He challenges, hawkeye says it's in, so the call is overturned, meaning that the ball was in, but because the call was out, which stops play, the rulebook says they have to replay the point. At the umpire's discretion, he can rule that the call didn't hinder a player, like, for example, a clean winner. The umpire saw that Harrison had a racquet on the ball, so he, as per the rules, has to rule that they replay the point.

At this point any observer may say that Harrison, despite having a racquet on the ball, was clearly not getting it back in play, as the ball was behind him and after leaving his racquet was clearly going out, but the umpire didn't, which is a strict but fair ruling. The umpire's job is to enforce the rules, he doesn't make them.

Fognini took exception to this, because if the linesman had called correctly (the ball was in), he would have won the point, because Harrison clearly wasn't hindered by the false call, and wasn't able to get the ball back in play.

Rules are rules, and Fognini was upset that they were being applied to him, which he is clearly not used to.

I like Fognini, but in another day and age there would be no Hawkeye, and he would just have to deal with bad calls like a grownup. He should have realized at the outset that the ruling was within the strictest interpretation of the rules, and gotten on with the next point, because there was no way he was winning an argument against this the umpire and the tournament referee, all in the middle of his opponent's service game.

Harrison hit the ball after the call?!? Really?!? His hand went up to signal "out", & although the ball hit his racquet, he made no attempt to get it back. He had no time to "react" to the call. I don't think it was a horrible call by strict interpretation of the rule book, but clearly Fognini was robbed of a well earned point.

Doesn't matter if Harrison hit the ball after the call. What's more important is that he also signaled that the ball was out... meaning if the linesman did not call it out, Harrison would have challenged and lost the point.
So basically in this scenario, who won the point (because of umpire decision) was based on linesman's call.

The racquet on the ball rule is so sketchy in a situation like this...

They both raised their hands because at the time they didn't know the call. This happens alot. Turns out the linesman called it out. So it's fognini's prerogative to challenge. He challenges, hawkeye says it's in, so the call is overturned, meaning that the ball was in, but because the call was out, which stops play, the rulebook says they have to replay the point. At the umpire's discretion, he can rule that the call didn't hinder a player, like, for example, a clean winner. The umpire saw that Harrison had a racquet on the ball, so he, as per the rules, has to rule that they replay the point.

At this point any observer may say that Harrison, despite having a racquet on the ball, was clearly not getting it back in play, as the ball was behind him and after leaving his racquet was clearly going out, but the umpire didn't, which is a strict but fair ruling. The umpire's job is to enforce the rules, he doesn't make them.

Fognini took exception to this, because if the linesman had called correctly (the ball was in), he would have won the point, because Harrison clearly wasn't hindered by the false call, and wasn't able to get the ball back in play.

Rules are rules, and Fognini was upset that they were being applied to him, which he is clearly not used to.

I like Fognini, but in another day and age there would be no Hawkeye, and he would just have to deal with bad calls like a grownup. He should have realized at the outset that the ruling was within the strictest interpretation of the rules, and gotten on with the next point, because there was no way he was winning an argument against this the umpire and the tournament referee, all in the middle of his opponent's service game.

Click to expand...

You are totally missing that Harrison raised his finger at the same time as he hit the ball with his racket indicating that he was stopping the point regardless of the call.

If he hadn't done that you would be right , but because of Harrison's actions the umpire should have awarded the point to Fognini.

You are totally missing that Harrison raised his finger at the same time as he hit the ball with his racket indicating that he was stopping the point regardless of the call.

If he hadn't done that you would be right , but because of Harrison's actions the umpire should have awarded the point to Fognini.

Click to expand...

Your logic is sound, but I don't think the Umpire would have been within the rules to do so. It's a petty discrepancy, but I don't think Harrison attempting to challenge a call that actually went for him is in the book. I think the umpire was within the letter of the rule in his decision, even though it seems illogical in this particular instance.

I think people are kinda missing the point. Whether the ref made the right or wrong call and I think he made the wrong call, Fogs reaction was terrible. He should have been giving a game penalty for the way he acted. Period. So the ref may have made the wrong call but he gave Fog a break.

Doesn't matter if Harrison hit the ball after the call. What's more important is that he also signaled that the ball was out... meaning if the linesman did not call it out, Harrison would have challenged and lost the point.
So basically in this scenario, who won the point (because of umpire decision) was based on linesman's call.

I think people are kinda missing the point. Whether the ref made the right or wrong call and I think he made the wrong call, Fogs reaction was terrible. He should have been giving a game penalty for the way he acted. Period. So the ref may have made the wrong call but he gave Fog a break.

I think people are kinda missing the point. Whether the ref made the right or wrong call and I think he made the wrong call, Fogs reaction was terrible. He should have been giving a game penalty for the way he acted. Period. So the ref may have made the wrong call but he gave Fog a break.

Click to expand...

Agree.

Besides, you really can't fault an umpire for erring on the side of caution. By which I mean, following the strictest interpretation of a rule. The rules should be held sacred if we are to have a fair competition. If Umpire's start being too free with their interpretation, then we start to have problems, like how often people get called for time violations. That's something people have constant arguments about, because of a vague rule, that has too much room for interpretation.

It looks like Harrison put up his finger to indicate he thought the ball was out. Players do this sometimes, maybe because they are used to calling their own lines so often in practice or grew up doing this in juniors it is just a habit. Regardless, Harrison did not stop play, so his finger going up seems irrelevant in this situation. He continued to track down the ball and just as he was swinging he heard an out call, so didn't complete his swing. It was an unfortunate line call (perhaps Harrison influenced it by putting up his finger), and Harrison would likely not have won the point if no call was made. But it was still the correct call to replay the point. Here is what Harrison said:
"I believe that if you were to watch the replay it was the right call because I was in a position I could play on it. Once I heard the call, I kind of let off my swing, which is why the ball didn't go in. But I was in position to make the shot."

Besides, you really can't fault an umpire for erring on the side of caution. By which I mean, following the strictest interpretation of a rule. The rules should be held sacred if we are to have a fair competition. If Umpire's start being too free with their interpretation, then we start to have problems, like how often people get called for time violations. That's something people have constant arguments about, because of a vague rule, that has too much room for interpretation.

Click to expand...

I dont blame the ref at all. That was a tough call. Could go either way. Ref was more than professional.

Other than it corresponds to what is shown in the video replay. Once he hears a call, it's quite possible he didn't complete his swing. And regardless, the chair umpire has to give Harrison the benefit of the doubt, so it's unreasonable to criticize him in this situation.

You cannot have perfect rules, but seriously, people need to stop complaining about a situation where in the past (as in just a few years ago) Fognini would have lost the point completely, instead of having to settle for a replay.

Btw what is the supervisor for? To come out when asked for and then say he can't do anything?

If it's well paid make me one.

Click to expand...

As the chair umpire is the only one in position to make a judgement about whether the out call came before, after or during Harrison's shot, those types of calls can't be overturned. If the chair umpire, however, actually did not know a rule, a call could be overturned. So it's really unlikely.

Let me settle if you fellas. I was there, seven rows back, at the service line, on Harrison's side. In real time, which is all the ump's got to look at, Fognini's shot looked long, Harry tracked it and let up when he heard the call. He would have hit a desperation lob that probably would have been smashed by Fog to end the point.

The rules on this are very clear cut. Replay the point. Harrison would have gotten the ball back in play. It would have been a prayer lob, but he could have gotten the ball back in play.

And then . . . Fognini acted like an absolute *** hat. Has he been high for the last 6 years as the rest of the tennis world has watched a thousand tennis matches where some dude barely gets his stick on the ball, but because it was called out, the point has to be replayed. Literally thousands of times we've seen servers or returners grumpily walk back to their positions to replay a point they were just 95% guaranteed to have won.

But that was just part of it. Fognini got called for three foot faults, but it should have been at least 6. He got really angry after the first one, I'm guessing cussed at the linesman in Italian, and then that linesman didn't have the balls to call what were at least two more blatant ff. At the end of the game, Fog tossed a ball he had in his pocket (not hard, mind you, but enough to show up the linesman) at the linesman.

My friend, whom I took to IW, and who doesn't watch a lot of tennis these days and who had no idea who Fog was said, "That guy's a real poor sport." Yup, that about sums it up. He was the better player and deserved to win the match, but shamed himself in the process.

And by way, the crowd was extremely supportive to Fog, at many times much more so to him than Harry. There wasn't any xenophobia of America-first in the slightest. He received hefty applause throughout the rest of the match, especially when he won it.

Fog's tantrum in the middle of Harrison's service game is more of an issue than the questionable umpire decision. That was straight up childlike.

Dropping F-bombs at the umpire and supervisor (and clearly on camera) while refusing to play might as well default your match.

Click to expand...

Seems like it, huh? But if you were called into your workplace office one day and was going to lose some money because of someone else's mistake, I don't think you'd just say, "Oh well...okay."
This is his livelihood....aka...money!
I don't blame him for getting upset, I'd do it too. Maybe even more.

Fog's tantrum in the middle of Harrison's service game is more of an issue than the questionable umpire decision. That was straight up childlike.

Dropping F-bombs at the umpire and supervisor (and clearly on camera) while refusing to play might as well default your match.

Click to expand...

I don't think Harrison's conduct was much better, yapping at the umpire and chasing the supervisor around the court himself and getting in Fognini's face like he did. What a jerk. He got a major break and if he's not sportsman enough to give the point to Fognini he should at least shut his yap and stay on his own side of the court.

Seems like it, huh? But if you were called into your workplace office one day and was going to lose some money because of someone else's mistake, I don't think you'd just say, "Oh well...okay."
This is his livelihood....aka...money!
I don't blame him for getting upset, I'd do it too. Maybe even more.

Click to expand...

I dunno, in sales pretty much everyone's mistake costs you cash. Doesn't mean you get to be a ******

The umpire gets one look at it...not 12 goes on a slow motion replay to determine the precise sequencing of call to Harrison making contact with the ball/raising his arm. The umpires decision was "reasonable" under the circumstances.